ArticleBrain and behavior2023
Benefits of a mosaic approach for assessing cortical atrophy in individual multiple sclerosis patients.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Putative mitochondrial components of frontotemporal lobar degeneration: topological correlations between mitochondrial density and atrophy in FTLD/FTD phenotypes.Journal of neurology · 2025Article
- New developments in imaging in ALS.Journal of neurology · 2025Review
- Domain-Specific Prediction of Clinical Progression in Parkinson's Disease Using the Mosaic Approach.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Benefits of a mosaic approach for assessing cortical atrophy in individual multiple sclerosis patients.Brain and behavior · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCortical gray matter (GM) atrophy plays a central role in multiple sclerosis (MS) pathology. However, it is not commonly assessed in clinical routine partly because a number of methodological problems hamper the development of a robust biomarker to quantify GM atrophy. In previous work, we have demonstrated the clinical utility of the "mosaic approach" (MAP) to assess individual GM atrophy in the motor neuron disease spectrum and frontotemporal dementia. In this study, we investigated the clinical utility of MAP in MS, comparing this novel biomarker to existing methods for computing GM atrophy in single patients. We contrasted the strategies based on correlations with established biomarkers reflecting MS disease burden.
methodsWe analyzed T1-weighted MPRAGE magnetic resonance imaging data from 465 relapsing-remitting MS patients and 89 healthy controls. We inspected how variations of existing strategies to estimate individual GM atrophy ("standard approaches") as well as variations of MAP (i.e., different parcellation schemes) impact downstream analysis results, both on a group and an individual level. We interpreted individual cortical disease burden as single metric reflecting the fraction of significantly atrophic data points with respect to the control group. In addition, we evaluated the correlations to lesion volume (LV) and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS).
resultsWe found that the MAP method yielded highest correlations with both LV and EDSS as compared to all other strategies. Although the parcellation resolution played a minor role in terms of absolute correlations with clinical variables, higher resolutions provided more clearly defined statistical brain maps which may facilitate clinical interpretability.
conclusionThis study provides evidence that MAP yields high potential for a clinically relevant biomarker in MS, outperforming existing methods to compute cortical disease burden in single patients. Of note, MAP outputs brain maps illustrating individual cortical disease burden which can be directly interpreted in daily clinical routine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.